Search FQXi

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home

Previous Contests

What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008

Forum Home
Introduction

Order posts by:
chronological order
most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Heidi Brown: on 10/31/17 at 13:40pm UTC, wrote [https://www.twitch.tv/]https://www.twitch.tv/

Helmut Hansen: on 10/4/12 at 6:52am UTC, wrote Dear Bradford, you are touching a Universe that is described by mystical...

Sergey Fedosin: on 10/4/12 at 4:22am UTC, wrote If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings...

Hoang Hai: on 9/28/12 at 4:04am UTC, wrote Dear Bradford Worthington Very interesting to see your essay. Perhaps all...

Jayakar Joseph: on 9/23/12 at 4:47am UTC, wrote Cont…. As the present event of three dimensional expression of an object...

Jayakar Joseph: on 9/23/12 at 4:07am UTC, wrote Dear Bradford Worthington, As per Coherently-cyclic cluster-matter...

Wilhelmus de Wilde: on 9/12/12 at 15:02pm UTC, wrote Bradford: A very clear essay, but as an architect (like me) we have to...

RECENT FORUM POSTS

Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Kuhn, Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this..." in Can Time Be Saved From...

Jorma Seppaenen: "Dear Georgina, I think you are perfectly right about the estimate of age..." in Why Time Might Not Be an...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Kuhn, Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this..." in Can Time Be Saved From...

Georgina Woodward: "Yes. The estimate of age of the visible universe, and age of stars, other..." in Why Time Might Not Be an...

akash hasan: "Some students have an interest in researching and space exploration. I..." in Announcing Physics of the...

Michael Jordan: "Excellent site. Plenty of helpful information here. I am sending it to some..." in Review of "Foundations of...

Anonymous: "Excellent site. Plenty of helpful information here. I am sending it to some..." in Constructing a Theory of...

Robert McEachern: ""all experiments have pointed towards this and there is no way to avoid..." in Review of "Foundations of...

RECENT ARTICLES

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.

The impossibility of building a perfect clock could help explain away microscale weirdness.

FQXi FORUM
May 24, 2019

CATEGORY: Questioning the Foundations Essay Contest (2012) [back]
TOPIC: The Universe Is a Constantly Changing, Diaphanous Boundary of the Present, Between the World of Infinite Possibility and the Non-Real Past by Bradford P. Worthington [refresh]

Author bradford p worthington wrote on Sep. 5, 2012 @ 12:41 GMT
Essay Abstract

Much thought concerning the nature of our universe with respect to the past, present and future, treats time as mathematically reversible in direction or as simultaneously and forever existent in a pure block universe, with intact pasts and futures that can be visited under appropriate conditions. It is proposed that our universe is a finite and constantly changing diaphanous boundary universe (DBU) of the present, engaging a larger non-real world of infinite potential from which this boundary is fueled. The diaphanous boundary universe of the present is the gatekeeper of reality, which evidences reality from within an infinite range of outcomes or possibilities in the greater world. All events have an occurrence of one and are therefore non-existent once they occur, except that all event information is retained in the present which informs the boundary regarding what future possibilities may occur. There are no fixed physical laws in the universe because the boundary is changing, altering its own nature and how it selects from future possibilities, creating the next now with new realities drawn from the infinite potential of the greater world. Time is absent from the structure of the universe except as an essential artifact within consciousness, which allows life to engage time with space in order to experience the interconnections and causal relationships of past, present and future.

Author Bio

Bradford Worthington attended Carnegie Mellon Univesity (BArch), and is an architect and musician, composer and inventor. He has studied nature, physics and cosmology throughout his life from a non-mathematical and diverse vantage point. Currently residing in Denver, CO.

Wilhelmus de Wilde de Wilde wrote on Sep. 12, 2012 @ 15:02 GMT
Bradford: A very clear essay, but as an architect (like me) we have to construct material entities from our ideas. Yours is interesting and has paralels with my perception of "reality". See "THE CONSCIOUSNESS CONNECTION", I await your reaction on my thread.

Wilhelmus

report post as inappropriate

Jayakar Johnson Joseph wrote on Sep. 23, 2012 @ 04:07 GMT

As per Coherently-cyclic cluster-matter paradigm of universe, the universe is inclusive of everything without any boundary in that nothing is exclusive of it. A finite fluctuation cycle of the universe within the infinite cycles of universe is descriptive of a cyclic time with the emergence of discrete times, in that the entire universe allows the existence of consciousness and intelligence more in specific localities.

With best wishes,

Jayakar

report post as inappropriate

Jayakar Johnson Joseph replied on Sep. 23, 2012 @ 04:47 GMT
Cont….

As the present event of three dimensional expression of an object is observational only external to the system, structure of the universe is not observational by an observer within the system, whereas time emerges only within a system.

Jayakar

report post as inappropriate

Hoang cao Hai wrote on Sep. 28, 2012 @ 04:04 GMT

Very interesting to see your essay.

Perhaps all of us are convinced that: the choice of yourself is right!That of course is reasonable.

So may be we should work together to let's the consider clearly defined for the basis foundations theoretical as the most challenging with intellectual of all of us.

Why we do not try to start with a real challenge is very close and are the focus of interest of the human science: it is a matter of mass and grain Higg boson of the standard model.

Knowledge and belief reasoning of you will to express an opinion on this matter:

You have think that: the Mass is the expression of the impact force to material (definition from the ABSOLUTE theory of me) - so no impact force, we do not feel the Higg boson - similar to the case of no weight outside the Earth's atmosphere.

Does there need to be a particle with mass for everything have volume? If so, then why the mass of everything change when moving from the Earth to the Moon? Higg boson is lighter by the Moon's gravity is weaker than of Earth?

The LHC particle accelerator used to "Smashed" until "Ejected" Higg boson, but why only when the "Smashed" can see it,and when off then not see it ?

Can be "locked" Higg particles? so when "released" if we do not force to it by any the Force, how to know that it is "out" or not?

You are should be boldly to give a definition of weight that you think is right for us to enjoy, or oppose my opinion.

Because in the process of research, the value of "failure" or "success" is the similar with science. The purpose of a correct theory be must is without any a wrong point ?

Glad to see from you comments soon,because still have too many of the same problems.

Kind Regards !

Hải.Caohoàng of THE INCORRECT ASSUMPTIONS AND A CORRECT THEORY

August 23, 2012 - 11:51 GMT on this essay contest.

report post as inappropriate

Sergey G Fedosin wrote on Oct. 4, 2012 @ 04:22 GMT
If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings in the contest are calculated in the next way. Suppose your rating is
$R_1$
and
$N_1$
was the quantity of people which gave you ratings. Then you have
$S_1=R_1 N_1$
of points. After it anyone give you
$dS$
of points so you have
$S_2=S_1+ dS$
of points and
$N_2=N_1+1$
is the common quantity of the people which gave you ratings. At the same time you will have
$S_2=R_2 N_2$
of points. From here, if you want to be R2 > R1 there must be:
$S_2/ N_2>S_1/ N_1$
or
$(S_1+ dS) / (N_1+1) >S_1/ N_1$
or
$dS >S_1/ N_1 =R_1$
In other words if you want to increase rating of anyone you must give him more points
$dS$
then the participant`s rating
$R_1$
was at the moment you rated him. From here it is seen that in the contest are special rules for ratings. And from here there are misunderstanding of some participants what is happened with their ratings. Moreover since community ratings are hided some participants do not sure how increase ratings of others and gives them maximum 10 points. But in the case the scale from 1 to 10 of points do not work, and some essays are overestimated and some essays are drop down. In my opinion it is a bad problem with this Contest rating process.

Sergey Fedosin

report post as inappropriate

Helmut Hansen wrote on Oct. 4, 2012 @ 06:52 GMT

you are touching a Universe that is described by mystical traditions throughout the history of mankind again and again. You mentioned David Bohm as a modern thinker who has tried to explore those larger but still inaccessible essence of reality that pervades all existence by means of scientific reasoning.

I agree with you that this deeper part of reality cannot directly be detected. I took just this inaccessibility as a starting point, asking me: How must the observable universe look like if its underlying foundation shall be ultimately inaccessible?

I found that transcendence is actually a higly restrictive condition with respect to the observable Universe. It requires a sort of radical non-dual conception (as it is described by the Doctrine of Advaita in more general terms) in order to secure the inaccessibility (i.e. invisibility) of the ONE or MIND.

Surprisingly our Universe does possess such a radical non-dual conception. There are empirical data that point to this specific order. In the FQXI_Contest 2009 I have sketched this idea.

Look at the essay: TAMING of the ONE.

May be this essay is of interest for you.

Kind Regards

Helmut

report post as inappropriate

Heidi Brown wrote on Oct. 31, 2017 @ 13:40 GMT
[https://www.twitch.tv/]https://www.twitch.tv/

report post as inappropriate

Heidi Brown wrote on Oct. 31, 2017 @ 13:41 GMT

[a href=https://www.twitch.tv/]homepage3[/a]

[twitch](https://ww
w.twitch.tv/)